Thursday, February 24, 2011

Maliki: Friday protests organized by Saddamists and al-Qaeda

Maliki's scare tactics won't work with Iraqis anymore and only serve to undermine his credibility. Iraqis are fed up with cronyism, corruption and graft:

Iraq's prime minister warned his people to boycott a planned anti-government protest scheduled for Friday, saying it was being organized by supporters of Saddam Hussein and al-Qaida.

Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki gave no proof for his assertion in a nationally televised speech Thursday, which echoed similar blanket statements he's made blaming terrorists and Saddam loyalists for an array of problems in the country.

Libyan ex-pats on Irish radio this afternoon were wondering why the UN/NATO weren't going into Libya with all guns blazing to stop a genocide. The radio host told them it was because of the bitter memory of the intervention in Iraq. Sounds like the Brunos/Oytalians etc. are getting the message out -- Libyans must die to assuage western leftist guilt. Sorry chaps, we'll remember to cry for you of course.

On the brighter side, the fact that these various protests and revolutions are so obviously and completely indigenous makes it much harder for al-Qaeda to pronounce the resulting governments as puppets to American Imperialism and to launch a jihad agin ‘em.

I'm sure this has already occurred to the dismay of Bruno and the ersatz ‘Italian’. No doubt JG will figure it out quick ‘nuff and soon will be properly dismayed as well.Al-Qaeda will probably, at some point, figure out a way to spin up a new faerie tale which justifies attacks on the new Arab governments, but it likely won't appeal near as much to the likes of JG and the self-styled ‘Truth Seeker’, on account of lacking the ‘American Imperialism’ angle that's been used to justify and rationalize so much of the Arab on Arab slaughter in Iraq.

Just now there were more Libyan ex-pats (including some medical doctors involved in some quite heroic-sounding direct aid) on Irish TV calling for foreign intervention, perhaps a no-fly-zone.

The TV program also interviewed Lawrence Korb, former assistant defence secretary with the Reagan administration. He was making the case that Europe and the international community needed to do something, and not look for a US lead which, he said, might only serve to delegitimise any movement accepting help. He was asked various questions about historical "western" involvement with Libya -- he was probably too gracious to point out (something I was reading earlier today) that when the Reagan admin imposed sanctions against Libyan oil exports, Europe wouldn't follow suit because of its own interests there.

[via Truth My Ass]: "Sure, it's almost certain that Hussein, like he had before, and like Gadaffi is doing now, would have responded by slaughtering his own citizens. But our government has presided over the deaths of tens of thousands of Iraqi innocents at this point—men, women, and children—and we've spent hundreds of billions of dollars in the process. A grassroots Iraqi revolution—even a bloody one—would almost certainly have been less costly."

Ah, a new circumlocation: "presided over", to add to "unleashed".

And, uh, what was not "grassroots Iraqi" about what happened in Iraq? I find it hard to believe that Truth My Hole is only interested in saving American taxpayer money.

There's an argument to be made that if we hadn't toppled Saddam Hussein (after the Iraqi tried and failed following the first Gulf War) then the Tunisians wouldn't have believed so strongly that they could govern themselves without a ‘strongman’ leader, and the current round of Arab uprisings would never have come to pass.

This cheeky criminal and Pinocchio blathers about what some Lybian "ex-pats" [sic! being the English word, that this ignoramus churl ignores, 'expatriates', such an abbreviation is ludicrous - would be, in case, 'expats'] would be emotionally asing for.

Now, people's revolutions are precisely that: and they have to win on their own strength, not out of the (interested) help of some foreign powers.

And the Libyan people will (I do fervently hope) win, and win by themselves in their struggle against their tyrant, without fake 'humanitarian' imperialists invading their country.

Only in that way they'll be able to establish a meaningful and genuine democracy.

"And the comical Ahmehwican-Sionist manifactured bogeyman "al-Qaida" in that case will disappear like snow in the sun, by the way."

Yes, much to my delight, emerging democratic government in the Arab world will very likely kill off al-Qaeda. That was, by the way, Bush's plan for Iraq. (Too bad the Bush administration so badly blew the follow up to the invasion; that screw up damn near cost us the whole project. The other notion, i.e. that al-Qaeda is an American manufactured boogeymen, is too ridiculous for me to worry with here. You'll come to regret that one quick enough on your own if you continue to try to sell it.)

And as for the same scumbag, the Shame of Oyreland: we'll see tomorrow and in the next few days and weeks what sort of 'fweedom'n'democwacy' his simian hewoes have established in Iraq.The obvious sad prediction is that the US troops still in the country will be more than happy to "preside over" the tyrannic clamp-down on the democratic Iraqi protesters, provided al-Maliki and his Iranian sponsor accept to leave them their bases beyond the Dec. 2011 date...

I do hope the Iraqi movement for democracy will be able to resist the repression.

"There's an argument to be made that if we hadn't toppled Saddam Hussein (after the Iraqi tried and failed following the first Gulf War) then the Tunisians wouldn't have believed so strongly that they could govern themselves without a ‘strongman’ leader, and the current round of Arab uprisings would never have come to pass."

And your argument in favor of the notion that the Tunisians would have nevertheless believed in ‘western-style’ representative government for themselves, no matter the example of Iraq, is what exactly?

Your argument that, without a model, they would nevertheless have sought to emulate the imperialists is what now?

I'd be more than delighted to see a Libyan democracy installed by the protestors there. Unlike Anonymussimo above, I'd prefer to see less of them cut down by helicopters with chain guns while they attempt it. But hey, what's a few piles of innocent Libyan corpses compared to the Brunos/Oytalians antipathy to outside help, right? No worries though -- the Americans won't touch it with a barge pole and I'm sure it'll all be long over before the European Council of Ministers gets up off their arses to call a meeting.

Yes, Marcus: the consensus amongst these warmongering animals is that if them eeeevil Ayrabs are doing things they object to, that's because they are precisely eeeevil eeeevil Moosleem sandniggers...... but if they do things they cannot openly oppose, such as asking for freedom and democracy and human rights, then it cannot be themselves: it must have been somebody else, in the West, who has inspired them!

One has to notice that ALL the demands for a No Fly Zone or a Western military intervention come from Libyan expatriates (including some of Gaddafi's diplomat who turned coat); while all voices from inside Libya, i.e., those who are taking the brunt of Gaddafi's repression, are against it.Whose voices are more relevant???

(Of course, dem Choinese bluehats wouldn't be great news for ENI, the biggest foreign oil producer in Libya, and operator of the Greenstream gas pipeline from Libya to Italy. Poor ole' ENI is already down over 5% on the Milan stock exchange.)

No surprise to find that the crooks Berlusconi and Gaddafi inaugurated the Greenstream pipeline together to much fanfare in 2007. What is a surprise (and a credit to the man) is the insight that Berlusconi had on the occasion:

(P.S. Ok, no prizes for spotting that the pic wasn't of the Greenstream inauguration. However, bonus points will be awarded for deciphering the photo on Muammar's chest. Something to do with Italy's historic love-in with Libya perhaps? No wonder An Oytalian is here to preach to us about the evils of colonialism -- his lot perfected it in Libya.)

And one more thing -- I remember when the village idiot Mocktada was An Oytalian's golden haired boy, when he was all about killing Americans (not to mention democratically elected Sadr City Council members) "in the national interest". An Oytalian now conveniently ignores that it's Little Black Turban himself calling for Iraqi protestors not to rock the boat with democracy protests. Careful what ya wish for... it may come back to bite ya.

Iraqi police allowed dozens of assailants to beat and stab peaceful protesters in Baghdad on February 21, 2011, Human Rights Watch said today. Security forces have an obligation to protect the right to assemble peacefully and to use only the minimum necessary force to protect lives if violence erupts, Human Rights Watch said...

"Promises by Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki to allow protests are meaningless when we see vicious attacks like the one on February 21," said Joe Stork, deputy Middle East director at Human Rights Watch. "Iraqi authorities should hold police who allowed this attack to happen accountable."

A suicide bomber has killed 11 people who were commemorating the birth of Prophet Mohammed in the western Iraqi city of Ramadi, police said.

The attacker detonated his explosives-packed vest in a cultural centre where the commemorations were ongoing about 5pm on Thursday, an officer in the media office of the local police said, speaking on condition of anonymity.

A further 18 people were wounded in the attack, he said, including provincial deputy governor Hekmat Jassim Zaidan.

An Iraqi journalist who threw his shoes at former U.S. President George W. Bush was arrested by security forces in Baghdad Thursday for encouraging people to rally for better services.

A relative of Muntazer al-Zaidi said the reporter was detained in the northern Adhamiya district whilst voicing his support for a mass demonstration expected to be held Friday.

Iraqis have been protesting for weeks against shortages of food, power and jobs, and against corruption as anti-government demonstration sweep across the Arab world."Security forces in Adhamiya district arrested Muntazer Zaidi and his brother Durgam. We don't know where they took them," Hashim al-Iraqi, a relative of Zaidi, told Reuters.

A security source confirmed Zaidi had been detained for "inciting people" to take part in protests.

LOL, Oytalian... de merest mention of yer utter callous disregard for oppressed people and ye revert to yer potty-mouth form.

Wouldn't it be much more entertaining to talk about why the population of Benghazi and the former province of Cyrenaica are so restive ... probably 'cos they remember the Italian genocide there? I believe yiz killed a third of the entire population, put 100,000 in concentration camps, and erected 300 km of barbed wire fence to cut off any resistance. Nice.

Why, dear Oytalian, ye have already given us de solution yerself ... Chinese bluehats shall descend from de skoies, bearing CNOOC contracts. Hopefully dey will also set light to one end of the Greenstream pipeline, so that some few hours later yer imperious lyin' Oytalian ass gets roasted.

It was, by the way, Bush's plan for the entire Middle East. Right, wrong or indifferent, come what may, what we are seeing is exactly what he wanted. Bwahahahahahah

"But hey, what's a few piles of innocent Libyan corpses compared to the Brunos/Oytalians antipathy to outside help, right?"

Unfortunately, I'm very much afraid that Quaddafi and Libya are going to illustrate to the world that the aftermath of the invasion of Iraq was not the doing of the evil murkins, but rather one of the several consequences of violent regime change. If you get really lucky, you emerge from the aftermath as the US or maybe France. Maybe Egypt will be so lucky. But it ain't happening in Libya. Oytalians anarchistic ramblings about the power of the people notwithstanding, the people of Libya are going to suffer the same fate that the people of Iraq suffered, and would be suffering today, if Saddam was still alive.

Hmmm. I see changes are a-comin' for Greenstream anyway. The EU has ruled this week that companies may not simultaneously own and supply the gas through any pipeline on European territory. This "unbundling" is supposed to be good for competition.

Vladimir Putin is already kicking up a major fuss. This is hardly surprising since he used Gazprom ownership of pipelines to deny access to gas trading company Itera, set up by Yeltsin in the oligarch era to asset strip state energy resources. He and his henchman at Gazprom, Medvedev (hmmm - funny how they're still joined at the hip) forced the transfer of Itera assets back to the state. He says it makes no sense to separate ownership of pipelines and the gas flowing through them, since only an integrated supplier like Gazprom can guarantee European gas supplies "for the next hundred years". Uh yeah, Mr. Putin -- makes no sense if you want to hang on to your stranglehold.

What the EU has in mind, presumably, is the ability to play off supplies arriving in Austria via the Russian Southstream and the EU/US Nabucco pipelines against each other. Nabucco arrives from Turkey, but has no guaranteed suppliers thus far. However, it is expected that Iraq and Egypt will be among the suppliers, so at least that's all safely sewn up and guaranteed. Whew! :)

(On the other hand, hope you knew what you were doing buying those Gazprom shares, Marcus).

Bridget -- I think the Libyan protestors will be successful, but probably at great cost to themselves in the absence of outside help. Even if Gaddafi was to put down an insurrection, I can't see the EU having the neck to normalise relations with him again. I see Obama has been speaking to UK, French and Italian leaders today. I'm sure Berlusconi will be regretting all that licking up to Gaddafi he had to do for the ENI pipeline, but hey, he's got other things on his mind anyway like going to jail for molesting little girls.

End of an era -- the last space shuttle launched this afternoon; as anticipated, it was unfortunately a couple of hours too late for any of us Europeans to get the spectacular sight of the external fuel tank being jettisoned on the way across the Atlantic, being already in the Earth's shadow at launch time. However, we should get to see the shuttle and the space station blaze across the sky close together tonight and tomorrow, before they dock. I spent half my teens waiting for the first shuttle launch ... now, 30 years later, it's nearly all over. Feels strange.

To Truth-Forgetter's article above: the author seems to have forgotten precisely what happened when the Iraqis did rebel in '91. In short, Saddam crushed them into little bits and then crushed the little bits into littler bits. The success of Egypt's uprising, different from Iraq's, was that the Egyptian army (because they were trained by the US, natch) would not open fire on the people the way Saddam's army would. This obvious distinction was pointed out in another what-if-Saddam-was-alive-today article I saw today, except from a believable author. I will try to find the link.

snip:Nonviolence could only work, he said, if the regime was reluctant to use violence against his own people. Saddam had no such compunctions. "If there were a million Gandhi's in Iraq," Na'il said, "Saddam would send the Republican Guard to kill every one of them, and they would do it without any hesitation."

[petes] "Libyan ex-pats on Irish radio this afternoon were wondering why the UN/NATO weren't going into Libya with all guns blazing to stop a genocide."

There's a little difference between intervention while massacres are occurring and intervention to "stop" massacres that occurred ten years prior. I guess that the concept of "logic" doesn't exist in ye olde Emerald Isles.

[lee] "makes it much harder for al-Qaeda to pronounce the resulting governments as puppets to American Imperialism and to launch a jihad agin ‘em. I'm sure this has already occurred to the dismay of Bruno"

Last I checked, it was the murkins that helped set up (together with the ISI) AL QAEDA and were recruiting its members, renowned for their trustworthiness.

[lee] "There's an argument to be made that if we hadn't toppled Saddam Hussein"

BWAA - HAAA HA HA HA!

Try again.

[bridget] "Unfortunately, I'm very much afraid that Quaddafi and Libya are going to illustrate to the world that the aftermath of the invasion of Iraq was not the doing of the evil murkins"

... careful, now. If things go WELL, then ya'll Leecey's are going to claim 'credit' for 'inspiring' said revolution. If it goes BAD, then clearly them Ay-rabs are genocidal an' violent an' so forth, and need murkin guidance to become better people.

[italian] "As for me, NO 'dismay' at all about the pro-democracy revolts in the Arab world: I do hope they will become democratic revolutions, and win."

AGREED. The Americans must be shattered that their dictator chums are goign down like skittles. How irksome it must be, to have thrown away billions of dollars, all for nothing.

According to the reports, Saif al-Arab, Gaddafi's youngest son, who was sent by his father to cooperate with Libyan security forces in the massive crackdown on pro-democracy protesters joined forces with the demonstrators in the eastern city of Benghazi on Thursday."

Though the internal protests in Tripoli have more or less been crushed by a brutal crackdown from the mercenary forces still loyal to Moammar Gadhafi, the massive nationwide movement continues to spread, and moves inexorably toward that last bastion of regime power, the Libyan capital.

At the moment this means Zawiya, a city just outside of Tripoli, where major clashes were reported earlier today as protesters and members of the military loyal to them apparently seized control of the city, the “gateway to Tripoli,” in fighting that left 17 dead.

Maliki insisted that Iraqis are free, and can therefore hold public protests any time they want, before adding that they were not allowed to protest on Friday and claiming that the Friday protests were a plot of Saddam Hussein backers. Hussein has been dead for years. Maliki likewise provided no proof that such people were behind the growing protest movement, and cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, who normally would be one of the leaders of such protests, formally played his role as part of the ruling government to a tee, adding that he has “doubts” about protesting against the government, at least now that it’s his government.

[lee] "There's an argument to be made that if we hadn't toppled Saddam Hussein (after the Iraqi tried and failed following the first Gulf War) then the Tunisians wouldn't have believed so strongly that they could govern themselves without a ‘strongman’ leader

[marcus + bruno + fake marcus] Bwaaaahahhahahahahahahhahahhahaha!!!!!

[lee] And your argument in favor of the notion that the Tunisians would have nevertheless believed in ‘western-style’ representative government for themselves, no matter the example of Iraq

*cough-cough*

That done, it's your burden to get your claim to fly. You have the burden of proof, or the burden of going forward, depending on how one wants to describe that; either description is sometimes used:

Infidel's Logic 101 - Shifting the burden of proof

"The burden of proof is always on the person asserting something. Shifting the burden of proof, a special case of Argumentum ad Ignorantiam, is the fallacy of putting the burden of proof on the person who denies or questions the assertion. The source of the fallacy is the assumption that something is true unless proven otherwise."

And, as you have absolutely no evidence or argument at all, other than poundin’ your own pulpit and howlin’, you've pretty well blown your argument here.

As the Washington historian William Blum has documented, since 1945, the US has destroyed or subverted more than 50 governments, many of them democracies, and used mass murderers like Suharto, Mobutu, and Pinochet to dominate by proxy. In the Middle East, every dictatorship and pseudo-monarchy has been sustained by America. In "Operation Cyclone," the CIA and MI6 secretly fostered and bank-rolled Islamic extremism. The object was to smash or deter nationalism and democracy. The victims of this Western state terrorism have been mostly Muslims. The courageous people gunned down last week in Bahrain and Libya, the latter a "priority UK market," according to Britain’s official arms "procurers," join those children blown to bits in Gaza by the latest American F-16 aircraft.

"At least 103 American soldiers have died in or near the valley’s maze of steep gullies and soaring peaks, according to a count by The New York Times, and many times more have been wounded, often severely."

And:

"“What we figured out is that people in the Pech really aren’t anti-U.S. or anti-anything; they just want to be left alone,” said one American military official familiar with the decision. “Our presence is what’s destabilizing this area.”"

However:

"Some veterans worry that the withdrawal will create an ideal sanctuary for insurgent activity — an area under titular government influence where fighters or terrorists will shelter or prepare attacks elsewhere."

It seems to me more and more clear that Afghanistan is an impossible place for an occupier to prevail. I recommend reading the whole article.

"Last I checked, it was the murkins that helped set up…AL QAEDA and were recruiting its members, renowned for their trustworthiness."

Then, I'll just have to question whether or not you even bothered to check. One of the very few things that bin Ladin and the CIA ever agreed upon is that we never gave any assistance to bin Laden nor to al-Qaeda, ever. (The rest of your foolishness isn't worth my time today. And then later, when you tried to pretend to an ability to apply formal logic--that was painful just to watch, that would've had to hurt if your brain weren't already numb.)

Well, then, you might as well just go ahead and explain for us the argument in favor of the notion that the Tunisians would have ‘nevertheless believed in ‘western-style’ representative government for themselves, no matter the example of Iraq’

The argument that, without an Arab, democratic model, they would nevertheless have sought to emulate the western imperialists is based on what?

Because, Lee, I don't think they are stupid. Of course they see that life under Khadaffi sucks and of course they can see which countries around the world are more successful and get ideas based on that.

By the way, Iraq is hardly a shining beacon of an example when it comes to democracy. It mifght be, but it's certainly not so today.

And what do you mean with "without an Arab, democratic model"? Lebanon is at least as democratic as Iraq is and has been for some time.

[lee] "One of the very few things that bin Ladin and the CIA ever agreed upon is that we never gave any assistance to bin Laden nor to al-Qaeda, ever."

Do you deny that the CIA helped the ISI set up radical Islamic groups?

Do you deny that the ISI helped out Al Qaeda?

Oh, and your absolutist statement is easily dismantled. The murkins and the Al Qaedists have cooperated when it was expedient to do so. Yeah, you're like two cousins caught doing it behind the woodshed, and both of you want to forget it ever happened.

"…of course they can see which countries around the world are more successful and get ideas based on that."

This would lead them to seek to emulate the Chinese, would it not?

"Iraq is hardly a shining beacon…when it comes to democracy. It mifght be, but it's certainly not so today."

True ‘nuff. The argument is that it's ‘what might be’ that's been noticed. The example of the proud Arab folks holding up their blue fingers for the cameras and all that.

"Lebanon is at least as democratic as Iraq is and has been for some time."

Don't agree there. The ‘confessional’, religiously based allocation of power in Lebanon is inherently anti-democratic. (Not to belabor the point that it was set up by, or at least under, the French during WWII, and wasn't an indigenous creation either.) In any case, assuming the Tunisians aren't stupid, they'll have noticed that the Lebanese model isn't exactly suitable for a nation that's 98% Sunni Muslim.

"Oh, and Bruno was right. You're shifting the burden of proof."

Nope, Bruno wasn't even close to right. I'm gonna havta assume your grasp on formal logic is almost as bad as his. (We can go there later if you'd like a short lesson, but for now…)

I'm gonna take a leap here, and try to grasp what I think must be the core of your argument: Something to the effect that the Tunisians just up and decided all of a sudden that Arabs could indeed be motivated to embrace representative government, and it had nothing at all to do with the example of the Iraqi embracing just that notion? And the reason it had nothing at all to do with the Iraqi embracing the notion is ‘cause Marcus don't like that idea at all and refuses to entertain it.

"The murkins and the Al Qaedists have cooperated when it was expedient to do so"

You sayin’ it's so don't make it so. And it ain't so. (Ain't sure I got a grasp here on what's the difference you draw between al-Qaeda and ‘the Al Qaedists’. What the hell distinction is that supposed to denote?)

At least seven people have been reported dead after clashes between security forces and protesters in Iraq, on an organised nationwide "Day of Rage" inspired by uprisings around the Arab world.

Though most of the protests were largely peaceful, clashes between security forces and demonstrators at rallies in the northern city of Mosul and the town of Hawija left seven dead and dozens injured, while separate rallies in north and west Iraq left a total of eight injured.

In the capital, troops and police were deployed in force at Tahrir Square, where around 5,000 demonstrators had gathered, and security forces erected concrete blast walls to block entrance to the Jumhuriyah bridge, which connects the demonstration site to Baghdad's heavily-fortified Green Zone.

Protesters nevertheless managed to overturn two of the walls, with some of them attempting to cross the bridge. Several lines of anti-riot police quickly blocked it off, however.

[lee] "I'm gonna take a leap here, and try to grasp what I think must be the core of your argument: Something to the effect that the Tunisians just up and decided all of a sudden that Arabs could indeed be motivated to embrace representative government, and it had nothing at all to do with the example of the Iraqi embracing just that notion?"

Notice, all, if you will, the fact that LEE doesn't uh, quote any such argument by Marcus?

How do you justify making the substitution for ‘radical Islamic groups’ in general (i.e. not al-Qaeda, other than al-Qaeda), to suddenly switching to the mention of al-Qaeda specifically. Where and how do you propose to connect those dots?

Tensions flare in Iraq ralliesThousands gather in Baghdad and northern Iraq demanding improved services and an end to corruption and food scarcity.

Jane Arraf, reporting from Baghdad, said that a violent standoff was happening between protesters and police.The protests also stretched from the northern city of Mosul to the southern city of Basra, reflecting the widespread anger many Iraqis feel at the government's seeming inability to improve their lives.

While in the south, a crowd of about 4,000 people demonstrated in front of the office of Governor Sheltagh Aboud al-Mayahi in the port city of Basra, Iraq's second-largest city, located 550km southeast of Baghdad.They knocked over one of the concrete barriers and demanded his resignation, saying he had done nothing to improve city services.They appeared to get their wish when Major General Mohammad Jawad Hawaidi, the commander of Basra military operations, told the crowd that the governor had resigned in response to the demonstrations.

While demonstrations in other Middle Eastern countries have focused on overthrowing governments, the protests in Iraq have centered on corruption, the country's chronic unemployment and shoddy public serviceslike electricity.

"We want a good life like human beings, not like animals," said Khalil Ibrahim, a protester in Baghdad.Like many Iraqis, he railed against a government that locks itself in the highly fortified Green Zone, home to the parliament and the US. embassy, and is viewed by most of its citizens as more interested in personal gain than public service."The government of the Green Zone is terrified of the people's voice,'' he said.

[bruno] Do you deny that the CIA helped the ISI set up radical Islamic groups? Do you deny that the ISI helped out Al Qaeda?

[lee] "How do you justify making the substitution for ‘radical Islamic groups’ in general (i.e. not al-Qaeda, other than al-Qaeda), to suddenly switching to the mention of al-Qaeda specifically."

You mean ISI specific collaboration like this:

"The ISI’s Complicity With al-Qaeda

“By the fall of 1998,” Steve Coll writes in Ghost Wars, a history of the CIA and al-Qaeda in Afghanistan since 1979, “CIA and other American intelligence reporting had documented many links between ISI, the Taliban, [Osama] bin Laden, and other Islamic militants operating from Afghanistan. Classified American reporting showed that Pakistani intelligence maintained about eight stations inside Afghanistan, staffed by active ISI officers or retired officers on contract. CIA reporting showed that Pakistani intelligence officers at about the colonel level met with bin Laden or his representatives to coordinate access to training camps for volunteer fighters headed for Kashmir.” "

The military juanta in Algeria has lifted the 19 year stretch of ‘emergency’ rule. But, they've instituted some new anti-democratic measures as well. It seems they may be looking to make a soft landing and not wind up like either Mubarak nor Qadhafi.

Oh, OK I see what Lee means. I justify it very simply. The CIA have training, weapons, advice etc etc to the ISI which was its hand in the region. The ISI helped out Al Qaeda. The CIA knew about this, even though they may not have had a direct link to bin laden himself. But ultimately the facilitation of the AQ group came from Washington itself. Note that the murkins were not particularly alarmed by the AlQaedists at the time. Why should they be? After all, some of their favourite protege's like Hekmatyar and co were arguably even worse.

"Do you deny that the CIA helped the ISI set up radical Islamic groups"

Are you alleging that the ISI created (i.e. ‘set up’) al-Qaeda, with or without CIA assistance? If not, how do you propose to connect the CIA with al-Qaeda via the ISI ‘setting up’ other radical Islamist groups which are not al-Qaeda? How do you propose to connect these dots?

As Osama bin Laden gets involved with the mujaheddin resistance in Afghanistan, he also develops close ties to the Saudi intelligence agency, the GID. Some believe that Saudi Intelligence Minister Prince Turki al-Faisal plays a middleman role between Saudi intelligence and mujaheddin groups (see Early 1980). Turki’s chief of staff is Ahmed Badeeb, and Badeeb had been one of bin Laden’s teachers when bin Laden was in high school. Badeeb will later say, “I loved Osama and considered him a good citizen of Saudi Arabia.” Journalist Steve Coll will later comment that while the Saudi government denies bin Laden is ever a Saudi intelligence agent, and the exact nature of his connections with the GID remains murky, “it seems clear that bin Laden did have a substantial relationship with Saudi intelligence.” [Coll, 2004, pp. 72, 86-87] The GID’s favorite Afghan warlord is Abdul Rasul Sayyaf, while Gulbuddin Hekmatyar is the Pakistani ISI’s favorite warlord. Bin Laden quickly becomes close to both Sayyaf and Hekmatyar, even though the two warlords are not allies with each other. [Dreyfuss, 2005, pp. 268] Some CIA officers will later say that bin Laden serves as a semi-official liaison between the GID and warlords like Sayyaf. [...] MAK [is] nurtured by Pakistan’s state security services, the Inter-Services Intelligence agency, or ISI, the CIA’s primary conduit for conducting the covert war against Moscow’s occupation.” [MSNBC, 8/24/1998] Bin Laden becomes closely tied to the warlord Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, and greatly strengthens Hekmatyar’s opium smuggling operations. [Le Monde (Paris), 9/14/2001] Hekmatyar, who also has ties with bin Laden, the CIA, and drug running, has been called “an ISI stooge and creation.” [Asia Times, 11/15/2001] MAK is also known as Al-Kifah and its branch in New York is called the Al-Kifah Refugee Center. This branch will play a pivotal role in the 1993 WTC bombing and also has CIA ties [...]In 1985, the CIA, MI6 (Britain’s intelligence agency), and the Pakistani ISI agree to launch guerrilla attacks from Afghanistan into then Soviet-controlled Tajikistan and Uzbekistan, attacking military installations, factories, and storage depots within Soviet territory. Some Afghans have been trained for this purpose since 1984 (see 1984-March 1985). The task is given to Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, an Afghan warlord closely linked to the ISI.[...]The Central Intelligence Agency, which has been supporting indigenous Afghan groups fighting occupying Soviet forces, becomes unhappy with them due to infighting, and searches for alternative anti-Soviet allies. MSNBC will later comment: “[T]he CIA, concerned about the factionalism of Afghanistan made famous by Rudyard Kipling, found that Arab zealots who flocked to aid the Afghans were easier to ‘read’ than the rivalry-ridden natives. While the Arab volunteers might well prove troublesome later, the agency reasoned, they at least were one-dimensionally anti-Soviet for now. So [Osama] bin Laden, along with a small group of Islamic militants from Egypt, Pakistan, Lebanon, Syria and Palestinian refugee camps all over the Middle East, became the ‘reliable’ partners of the CIA in its war against Moscow.” The CIA does not usually deal with the Afghan Arabs directly, but through an intermediary, Pakistan’s ISI, which helps the Arabs through the Maktab al-Khidamat (MAK) run by Abdullah Azzam. [MSNBC, 8/24/1998]

"But ultimately the facilitation of the AQ group came from Washington itself."

This on account of the ISI was supposedly the CIA's ‘hand in the region’? I.e: The ISI works for us and we control the movements of the ISI? This one's too preposterous to entertain my attention any further. Probably the best you got or can get, but still too preposterous to entertain.You are, accordingly, dismissed on account of being too stupid to fuck with any further.

So [Osama] bin Laden, along with a small group of Islamic militants from Egypt, Pakistan, Lebanon, Syria and Palestinian refugee camps all over the Middle East, became the ‘reliable’ partners of the CIA in its war against Moscow.

HERE is a source which paints an even closer picture of American - bin Laden cooperation:

"The Mujahiddin were allies of convenience for the United States, which was bent on winning the Cold War.

In an effort to augment the Mujahiddin forces, the U.S. encouraged the influx into Afghanistan of thousands of idealistic Muslims, eager to participate in the struggle, from countries throughout the Middle East. One of the first of these expatriate Arabs was Osama bin Laden, who was "recruited by the CIA" in 1979, according to Le Monde (9/15/01). Bin Laden operated along the Pakistani border, where he used his vast family connections to raise money for the Mujahiddin; in doing so, he "worked in close association with U.S. agents," according to Jane’s Intelligence Review (10/1/98).

Despite CIA denials of any direct Agency support for Bin Laden’s activities, a considerable body of circumstantial evidence suggests the contrary. During the 1980s, Bin Laden’s activities in Afghanistan closely paralleled those of the CIA. Bin Laden held accounts in the Bank for Credit and Commerce International (BCCI), the bank the CIA used to finance its own covert actions (London Daily Telegraph, 9/27/01). Bin Laden worked especially closely with Hekmatyar--the CIA’s favored Mujahiddin commander (The Economist, 9/15/01). In 1989, the U.S. shipped high-powered sniper rifles to a Mujahiddin faction that included bin Laden, according to a former bin Laden aide (AP, 10/16/01). "

"So [Osama] bin Laden, along with a small group of Islamic militants from Egypt, Pakistan, Lebanon, Syria and…etc."

Yeah, I saw that wholly conclusory statement. Didn't give it a second thought at the time, ‘cause it's no more proven when they draw the conclusion without evidence than when you do so. (This concept appears to exceed your mental grasp.) Still no connection of the dots; just you guys wishing there was a connection, and pretending it to be so based on the totally preposterous proposition that the ISI reports to the CIA.

(Gotta wonder why I'm still fuckin’ with you over this--too stupid to take seriously.)

Well, Bruno, your 8:06 AM posting appears to argue that, before he went into business for himself, bin Laden was involved in financing some of the same mujahadeen as were receiving financing and support from the CIA.

There may be some truth to that. Whether that is true or not, it doesn't logically connect up with any American support for bin Laden or for al-Qaeda

Me: "…of course they can see which countries around the world are more successful and get ideas based on that."

Lee: "This would lead them to seek to emulate the Chinese, would it not?"

I don't see that there is much evidence at all that China is more "successful" than the US, or any western European country, as a whole. Bigger population and faster economic growth - yes. But their GDP per capita is still way below ours and that's just the economic side of things. I'd guess protesters rising up to a repressive regime like Khadaffis are looking somewhat at human rights also, and China isn't exactly a good example there. So no, I don't think that "would lead them to seek to emulate the Chinese".

Me: "Lebanon is at least as democratic as Iraq is and has been for some time."

Lee: "Don't agree there. The ‘confessional’, religiously based allocation of power in Lebanon is inherently anti-democratic."

Lebanon's democracy has its flaws for sure. Andd possibly I can go along with your ssuggestion that the democratic framework is better in Iraq, but in practice Iraq isn't working very well. It might one day, but it isn't now.

You could replace sect with tribe and Libya has its fault lines just like Lebanon has.

Lee: "I'm gonna take a leap here, and try to grasp what I think must be the core of your argument: Something to the effect that the Tunisians just up and decided all of a sudden that Arabs could indeed be motivated to embrace representative government, and it had nothing at all to do with the example of the Iraqi embracing just that notion?"

The thing is that I don't buy your premise that Tunisians "up and decided all of a sudden that Arabs could indeed be motivated to embrace representative government".

Lee: "And the reason it had nothing at all to do with the Iraqi embracing the notion is ‘cause Marcus don't like that idea at all and refuses to entertain it."

No, the reason is that the protests had other root causes. Unemployment, lack of options, frustration, and then a trigger in the form of the guy who manifested his frustration over his lack of options by setting himself on fire.

I've seen many interviews with protesters many pictures of their placards and nowhere have I seen anyone voice the idea that they long for the freedoms of Iraqis.

Petes, qaddafis going down alright, and taking lots of protestors down with him. But that's not the impending disaster I'm referring to. All hell is going to break loose. His sons, the military, and God only knows who all else is going to be making a grab for it. just like Iraq in 2006 and 2007 once the noble resistance got itself well enough organized to take on the American military. Lots of Libyans are going to die, and I don't see any nascent democrats nor a presence in the country akin to the US in Iraq or the military in Egypt to bring any semblance of order.

At long last the question of what might Iraq have been had not the murkins not intervened may be answered.

Italian footwear manufacturer salvatore ferragamo have partnered for the designer’s first fragrance and bath products collection offered to guests at Waldorf Astoria hotels.

Ferragamo has designed a 20-piece bath and amenities collection to be available exclusively in Waldorf locations around the world. The collection launched earlier this week with a bnmuypwu reception in Mr. Ferragamo’s hometown at the Waldorf-owned Rome Cavalieri.

“This is a perfect match as Waldorf Astoria Hotels & Resorts and salvatore ferragamo are two nearly 100-year-old brands that started with an idea and have evolved into global luxury brands,” said John Vanderslice, global head of luxury and lifestyle brands for Hilton Worldwide, McLean, VA.

“From the many salvatore ferragamo luxury goods and products to the worldwide landmark destinations of the Waldorf Astoria